Archived: Pymgate House

Is the service safe?

Some of the people who were living at Pymgate House were living with dementia and could not always give their verbal opinions on the service they received. However we observed during our visit that people were treated kindly and with respect. We were also able to understand from the people we spoke with that they were happy with the care provided.

From the records we looked at we saw that people who lacked capacity were fully protected when decisions were necessary regarding their health and personal care needs.

A relative also told us that they were more than pleased with the care their relative received. They also told us, 'I visit here regularly and I have never seen anything that would cause me concern in the way that people are treated ".

At the time of our inspection we noted that the home was clean, tidy and free from unpleasant odours.

Staff training was in place to protect the people who lived at Pymgate House such as moving and handling, safeguarding adults and health and safety. This helped to ensure that the staff team had the qualifications and skills to meet people's needs. National Vocational Qualifications (NVQ) had been undertaken by the staff team in Health and Social Care. Fire awareness training had been provided at the home for the workers.

We looked at two staff recruitment records and saw that the provider had carried out the appropriate pre-employment checks before they started working at the home.

Is the service effective?

A relative spoken with said that they were kept informed about their relative's care whenever they visited the home. They also told us that if they had any concerns they felt comfortable with talking to the manager or the care workers. They also told us "The owners of the home live here too and are involved with people's care."

From the two care plans that we looked at we saw that there was clearly written information to make sure that people received appropriate care to meet their needs. We saw records to confirm that healthcare professionals such as GP's and district nurses also visited the home as requested. Notes were made of the visits on the person's care plan.

The home had been adapted and extended. The first floor could be accessed via a stair lift. We saw there was equipment available such as a hoist, assisted baths, wheelchairs, pressure relieving mattress and cushions to meet people's needs.

The deputy manager told us that the staff team worked well together and that most of the staff were established and had worked at the home for a number years.

Is the service caring?

Two people spoken with said that they had no concerns about the care provided. A relative said "I am very pleased with the care here; I am always kept informed and I am included in any meetings about my mother.'

People spoken with said that they had no complaints and that the staff were good. One person said the staff were 'All very nice'. They also told us that they felt well supported and cared for by the staff.

A relative spoken with told us that they chose the home for their mother because they liked that the home was smaller than others they had looked at previously. They said, 'It's very homely here.' All of the people we saw on the day of the inspection looked clean; they were smartly dressed, and they looked comfortable.

We saw staff showing respect to people when delivering their individual care and in a way that promoted their privacy and dignity.

Is the service responsive?

We saw that people's needs were assessed before they were admitted to the home to help make sure that their needs could be met. We saw that care plans were in place that reflected the person's care needs to help make sure they received appropriate care. However we noted that necessary individual risk assessments to guide staff in managing individual risks were not in place.

Care plans and medication records were checked regularly to help make sure that people's changing needs were being met.

The manager told us that the staffing levels reflected the number of people who were living at the home and the level of their care needs. The people we spoke with said there was always enough staff at the home to meet their needs.

A person spoken with told us that the GP was called as and when necessary and their medication was always given appropriately.

Is the service well-led?

Pymgate House was owned by a Mr. and Mrs. Fox who are very involved with the day to day management of the home. Mrs. Fox is also the registered manager of Pymgate House. There was also a deputy manager who was also responsible for the day to day care of the people who lived at Pymgate House.

The manager told us that questionnaires were distributed to the people who used the service in order to obtain their views and opinions about the service. The surveys were last conducted in 2013 and the results were shared with people who use the service and their relatives.

Appropriate training for staff had been provided for all staff following our last inspection.

We were told by people who used the service and a relative that they could talk to the managers if they had any concerns about the care being provided.

We looked at Regulation 11 which requires the registered person to make suitable arrangements to ensure that service users are safeguarded against the risk of abuse. We were able to speak with a member of staff and we were provided with a training record which showed that training had taken place in order to meet with this requirement.

We looked at Regulation 21 which requires the registered person to operate effective recruitment procedures which includes a Criminal Record Bureau (CRB) check. We were able to look at a spread sheet which included all the staff names, dates of birth, disclosure numbers and date of issue. This information showed that all the care workers had received a CRB check.

We looked at Regulation 23 which requires that the registered person has suitable arrangements in place to appropriately support the staff team in relation to their responsibilities, to enable them to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. The training records showed that the staff team was trained to National Vocational Qualification standards. Moving and handling training and whistleblowing training had recently been updated. Supervision of staff was on going with both the provider and deputy manager working alongside the staff daily.

People who lived at the home told us "I am able to decide what I want to do during the day" and "I can make choices about how I want to spend my time" and "I am involved in choosing menus and planning activities".

A relative who was visiting at the time of the inspection told us that they had always seen the staff treat people with respect and dignity.

We saw that each person had a pre-admission assessment carried out before they went to live at the home. We looked at five care plans and saw that they contained a completed preadmission assessment document. The assessment provided details about the individual's care needs such as allergies, their likes and dislikes.

The two staff members we spoke with were able to show they were aware of the individual needs of the people who used the service. They also told us they were able to support people with these needs. We saw staff spending time talking with and caring for people to ensure that they received the care and support they needed.

We spoke to two people who told us they "felt safe". They also told us that they were aware if they had any concerns who to talk to about them.

One relative told us that 'I am able to go home knowing my relative is safe and secure" and "I have no concerns or worries about the safety and well-being of my relative".